The Wall Street Journal is on to us...
12-18-2007, 10:39 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 152
The Wall Street Journal is on to us...
12-18-2007, 10:53 AM
#2
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: B737 Captain
Posts: 37
"Ultimately the U.S. may have to adopt new, quicker training models for pilots, Mr. Darby says, and airlines may have to start paying for early schooling for pilots and raise starting salaries for pilots, currently as low as $24,000 a year."
Really?
"Airlines also point to military training programs that have pilots landing high-performance jets on aircraft carriers within one year and 200 to 300 hours."
Not after a six week ground school.
"The notion that you need X amount of hours in a Cessna 172 in order to move up in today's environment with today's technology and tools is wrong," said Roger Cohen, president of the Regional Airline Association, which represents smaller carriers. "Someone with fewer hours but better hours, quality hours in modern training, may be more capable."
Put down the crack pipe pal.
Really?
"Airlines also point to military training programs that have pilots landing high-performance jets on aircraft carriers within one year and 200 to 300 hours."
Not after a six week ground school.
"The notion that you need X amount of hours in a Cessna 172 in order to move up in today's environment with today's technology and tools is wrong," said Roger Cohen, president of the Regional Airline Association, which represents smaller carriers. "Someone with fewer hours but better hours, quality hours in modern training, may be more capable."
Put down the crack pipe pal.
12-18-2007, 11:05 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 876
Here is an idea. Replace every 2 RJ's with 1 737 and tell Bobby Earl that he can only fly out of Dothan, AL to Atlanta two times a day, not every other hour. Then raise the starting pay at the regionals to something that a thrirty year old with two kids and a wife can live off of.
12-18-2007, 11:05 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,750
European airlines put low-time pilots in large equipment all the time. The difference is in the selection. Select 0-time pilots properly and train them right and it can be done safely.
The problem here in the US is all the corner cutting that takes place at every level.
Bring on the flames. But I've done it in Europe with JAA and here with FAA. The JAA stuff is way more selective.
At the end of the day, experience is the most important. But the fact remains that low-time pilots can be good pilots if they are selected properly and trained properly.
BTW, the washout rate and non-selection rate in Europe is very high. And no, flying an A320 or 737 is not harder than flying an RJ.
Just my $.02.
The problem here in the US is all the corner cutting that takes place at every level.
Bring on the flames. But I've done it in Europe with JAA and here with FAA. The JAA stuff is way more selective.
At the end of the day, experience is the most important. But the fact remains that low-time pilots can be good pilots if they are selected properly and trained properly.
BTW, the washout rate and non-selection rate in Europe is very high. And no, flying an A320 or 737 is not harder than flying an RJ.
Just my $.02.
12-18-2007, 11:29 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 1,531
No to mention every student is a college graduate and had to be in the 96th percentile of candidates to get selected, and on average had 150 hours or more when they started training (for ROTC or OTS/OCS guys)....
12-18-2007, 11:37 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 103
I think my favorite part is where it says starting salaries are as low as 24K a year. I'll be excited when my salary gets up to that.
Second favorite part is when it says "But now some are down around 500 hours, with as little as 50 of those hours in multiengine airplanes." Tell that to PSA, TSA, Piedmont, and Mesa. Did they not do their research or are they just afraid to tell the public how inexperienced their pilots can be?
Second favorite part is when it says "But now some are down around 500 hours, with as little as 50 of those hours in multiengine airplanes." Tell that to PSA, TSA, Piedmont, and Mesa. Did they not do their research or are they just afraid to tell the public how inexperienced their pilots can be?
12-18-2007, 11:37 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left and Right of Whatever
Posts: 406
So, with all this *****ing and complaining, are any of you guys going to step up and write a letter to the editor in response to this guy, or going to sit here and do nothing?
How does that old saying go? Lead, follow, or...what again?
How does that old saying go? Lead, follow, or...what again?
12-18-2007, 11:38 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: FO
Posts: 254
"An old pilot adage says the job entails hours of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror."
I'm glad he published this statement. Way to make the flying public feel secure!!
"In addition, the International Civil Aviation Organization has developed a "multi-crew pilot license" that targets training directly to co-pilot duties. The program requires 240 hours of flying or simulator time and takes about a year, if students pass competency tests, to place someone in an airline job. Europe has adopted MPL, and Australia and China are moving ahead with implementation, according to the International Air Transport Association, but the U.S. hasn't yet begun to study of the idea."
Anyone wanna take bets on how long it'll be before we start to see this here...if ever??
I'm glad he published this statement. Way to make the flying public feel secure!!
"In addition, the International Civil Aviation Organization has developed a "multi-crew pilot license" that targets training directly to co-pilot duties. The program requires 240 hours of flying or simulator time and takes about a year, if students pass competency tests, to place someone in an airline job. Europe has adopted MPL, and Australia and China are moving ahead with implementation, according to the International Air Transport Association, but the U.S. hasn't yet begun to study of the idea."
Anyone wanna take bets on how long it'll be before we start to see this here...if ever??
12-18-2007, 11:59 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: JS32 FO
Posts: 848
"Major airlines can still require several thousand cockpit hours of experience before taking the controls of Boeing and Airbus jets, and haven't had a shortage of applicants. But Mr. Darby thinks regional airlines will be forced to drop as low as FAA licensing minimums -- 250 hours to get a commercial license necessary to serve as a co-pilot -- and bigger airlines will ultimately feel the pinch."
I doubt the majors will feel it much. They offer better QOL, pay, schedules or something that has nearly every regional pilot waiting in line for an interview or job.
I doubt the majors will feel it much. They offer better QOL, pay, schedules or something that has nearly every regional pilot waiting in line for an interview or job.
12-18-2007, 12:21 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Flight Instructor
Posts: 623
Air Force Pilot training takes 13 months, Navy takes 18-24 months..."within one year"???? Maybe a Navy guy could chime in, but I don't think you even see a carrier in the Navy until year 3.
No to mention every student is a college graduate and had to be in the 96th percentile of candidates to get selected, and on average had 150 hours or more when they started training (for ROTC or OTS/OCS guys)....
No to mention every student is a college graduate and had to be in the 96th percentile of candidates to get selected, and on average had 150 hours or more when they started training (for ROTC or OTS/OCS guys)....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
